Designers, planners and artists propose innovations, changes and
interventions.This seminar offers an
introduction to a range of approaches to justifying these changes. We will
consider the kinds of reasons for change, their bases in social, philosophical
and design reasoning and their usefulness in justifying change to different
audiences. We will investigate fallacies, ideologies and common contemporary
problems in justification.

Whether you are a conservative, a revolutionary, a radical or a
devotee of apathy, your position is based on reasons, of which you may or may
not be aware. Sometimes reasons take the form of unexamined associations or
presuppositions. We will begin the course with a review of common fallacies in
thinking. While all these are fallacies from a philosophical standpoint, some
fallacies (like hypostatization) may have a social or rhetorical “truth”.That is, some fallacies work to justify
action.

We will then examine different kinds of reasons given to justify
action. Whenever we claim that we should do something, we usually combine
arguments that are both normative and descriptive. That is, our arguments about
what we should do or what we should change depend on some relationship between
what is and what should be.

There are different approaches to describing what “is”‚ and people
can and do differ in their approaches to description. Ethics and aesthetics are
those sets of approaches to justifying what “should” be done. We will introduce
major approaches to ethics and aesthetics at this point.

It is here that we run up against relativism. Since reasonable
people can disagree, how can anything be
justified?Here we will consider the
difference between ultimate authoritative justification and arguments that
would convince different audiences.

Relativism though has its own cultural power, so we will spend
some time considering where relativism comes from, what is wrong with it and
what is right with it.

Ideas of relativism are fundamentally related to conceptions of
personhood and the nature of humans as social selves or isolated selves. As we
will use the history of the development of contemporary ideas of the self to
inform our discussions of relativism, we will apply our understanding of the
concept of self, or personhood, to a review of theories of knowledge. Who we
are as selves or persons affects ideas of what we can justifiably know.

Here we will need to address the concept of an ideology. We will
consider an ideology both from a descriptive perspective as a system of thought
that brings coherence to a time period, and from its critical usage as a system
of thought that prevents people from acting in ways that would improve their
lives. We will review and discuss important traditions in the criticism of
ideologies.

Finally, we will apply these theories to fundamental problems in
our disciplines. For planners and designers in the public realm, the “public
interest”‚ is a core professional, political, rhetorical and philosophical
problem. It is a fundamental rhetorical justification within the field, but it
is an idea that requires critical investigation.

For designers and artists, “aesthetic reasons” offer a similar
kind of problem. While we give aesthetic reasons, they have been subject to
severe criticism from several quarters.

Both the public interest‚ and aesthetic reasons‚ have been
victimized in the context of widespread cultural relativism and scientism. We
are suspicious of them in ways that are to our detriment as human beings. On
the other hand, we are also suspicious of them, given their history of use in
domination, suppression and illegitimate justification. How can we use our
arsenal of theories to develop our own position in our own discipline?

Outline of Elements:

Rules for the
Hard of Thinking:A Field Guide to
Fallacies

Real Life
Reasons:Norms, Descriptions,
Prescriptions and Predictions

History and
Reasons

Cutting Yourself
on Occham‚s Razor:Thick and Thin Descriptions and Reasons

Communities of
Justification in Design, the Humanities and the Sciences

Relativism in
Historical Context:from Religious Peace
to the Isolated Self

Persons and
Knowledge

Ethics, Knowledge
and Design

Ethics and
Ideology

Learning Outcomes:

On completion of the course, students will be able to:

identify
and avoid common fallacies in design justification

recognize,
understand, critique and respect different approaches to the justification
of interventions

understand
and critique the shortcomings of common approaches to justification

thoughtfully
use different approaches to justification with an awareness of audience

critically
examine common contemporary ideologies and recognize their role in design,
art and planning

understand
the role of ethics in justification of all kinds of design, and

apply their
understanding of conceptual frameworks to design and design critique.

Course Expectations:

As a graduate seminar, learning is expected to occur through
engagement with the material in class and outside of class.Students will not be able to complete course
requirements without attending each week. Engaging in seminar discussions is
required.

Students are expected to prepare for each class session by reading the assigned materials, and
writing a short reading response
that identifies main ideas and key issues from the readings along with key
questions for discussion.

Students will take turns co-leading
seminar sessions. Leaders are expected to find and present examples that
illustrate the application of the readings in the built environment or in
‘real-life’ issues.They are also
expected to present their reading notes and introduce key questions for
discussion.

Students are expected to participate
in a number of events outside of assigned class time.We have suggested a series of lectures;
students may find other appropriate venues and substitute them (subject to
approval).These lectures/events should
be used to contribute to class discussion of issues.

Each student will prepare and present a final project that
addresses the application of core concepts in the readings to a problem in
their discipline. This assignment can take the form of a term paper, a design
critique, or a design. Students will propose a topic/project/paper by the
seventh week.Class time (with due date
benchmarks) will be spent on the development and review of projects. Students
will present this paper/project to reviewers in the final class sessions.

Each student will be responsible for reviewing and assessing their
own and others work.

Assigned Readings:

We have put together a BIG reader for this course. Many are
excerpts from classic works or introductions to major schools of thought.

The reader is available for purchase through University Readers at
http://www.universityreaders.com
In the top right corner, click on the orange "Students Buy Now"
button, select Iowa State University … So far ours is the only class listed … I
think you will be able to find it.

University Readers has a toll free number (800-200-3908) if
you have any problems ordering online or getting your free downloads of the
first week’s readings.

Requirements and Grading:

Students
must complete all requirements to pass the course.

Participation in all sessionscomplete/incomplete

Engagement with material/class:

Reading Responses
(one for each class)20%

Class leadership
(two sessions)20%

Review and
Assessment of Own and Others Work10%

Final Project:

Project proposal
and development20%

Final
product/paper20%

Presentation10%

Rubrics will be available on the course website for each graded
element in order to develop their work and to assess the work of others.

Reading Assignments and Course Schedule

The reading assignment schedule is in the Table of Contents of the
reader.For January 20, you are expected
to have read: